Closing Arguments

Jodi’s Testimony and Her Presumption of Innocence
It is up to the State to prove that what she said on the witness stand could not possibly have happened the way she said it did. And that does not refer to some insignificant mistake or forgotten sequence of events five years prior. It all has to do with what happened in that bathroom that afternoon. (All the rest around it, what she did before and what she did afterwards is all smoke and mirrors with which Martinez wanted to dazzle as many people as possible. And he apparently did a damn good job of it.) Even if this woman actually did come up with the most bizarre and most ridiculous premeditation plan in history, even if she was angry, even if she was jealous, the fact is that if Travis attacked Jodi in that bathroom that afternoon she had every right to defend herself. And the smoking gun here is Travis’ pause at the sink in the middle of the violence to mess with the faucet. This, in addition to the documented mental and emotional abuse he handed out, the fact that Jodi never treated him that way, his traumatic family history, the fact that Jodi was moving on with her life is all circumstantial evidence that points to Travis being most likely the aggressor. Notice I say “most likely”. I know dissenters want proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he attacked her but that again is not how the system works. The State must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that there is little chance that he was the aggressor but, to the contrary, there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence indicating that of the two, Travis was most likely the one who would initiate an attack. That, in a self-defense case, is called “Not Guilty”.

Here are seven facts that indicate Jodi did not premeditate a murder, she was not the aggressor and her story makes more sense than the State’s:

1. Ryan Burns testified that Jodi called him between 8 and 9 the previous night telling him she was on her way, a logical indicator that she had no plans to visit, much less kill, Travis. Who premeditating a murder intentionally, and for no good reason, sabotages their own alibi?
2. Blood from Travis’ right ear most assuredly came from the gunshot wound (as opposed to the State’s ridiculous contention that it came from a chest wound), a logical indicator that the gunshot came before the knife wounds (i.e., gunshot first, as Jodi testified).
3. The aspirated blood on the mirror is also most logically from the damage done to his jaw by the bullet (as opposed again to the State’s theory that it came from some hypothetical, undocumented knick to a lung), another indicator that the gunshot came first (as per Jodi’s testimony).
4. Travis’ obvious pause at the sink in the middle of the violence is a logical indicator as to who was controlling the attack since only the attacker has the freedom to pause in the middle of the attack.
5. Travis had only five wounds on his hands (with only one on his dominant hand) and none on his lower arms which is where one would expect to see them if he was being violently attacked for over 60 seconds.
6. The fact that Jodi endured practically no injuries during this two minute battle with a 200 pound man (with 16-1/2 inch biceps) is not an indicator that she was the attacker but rather that, for most of the battle, she was running away from the violence (as per her testimony) and it wasn’t until the final moments, when he finally caught up with her, that she inflicted all the knife wounds.
7. The State’s theories defy common sense.

25 Questions to Ponder
1. Why stage the gun theft as a burglary (as the State contends) such that the police are immediately called and a record is created? Why not just “borrow” it? It might not be discovered missing for months and it probably wouldn’t be known exactly when it went missing. But instead she supposedly went out of her way to create a police record?

2. If she was going to steal a gun to commit a murder, why didn’t she “stage a burglary” at her parents’ house where her father kept numerous guns, including a 9mm, a gun with a silencer and one that was even unregistered?

3. Why, in her master plan to murder someone, would she supposedly change out the bullet type for one less powerful?

4. Why visit friends in the rental car if its supposed purpose was to travel in a car not connected with her?

5. Why borrow gas cans from someone who will mention them to someone should he ever be questioned? Why not buy gas cans with cash in no-man’s land or in some large store where she’d be just one of many customers?

6. Why tell her supposed alibi that she’s on her way if she’s already supposedly planning a six hour trip to Mesa, commit a murder, and then at least another 10 hour trip to Salt Lake City? What kind of alibi is that?

7. Why go to the trouble of supposedly removing license plates to hide her presence at Travis’ house when it would have been infinitely easier to just drape something over the plates or park down the street? Wouldn’t a missing license plate draw even more attention to the car?

8. Why didn’t she kill him upon arrival at 4 am? She’s already going to be late getting to her so-called alibi.

9. Why didn’t she shoot him (or quietly slit his throat) during the night when he was sleeping? Why wait until he’s fully awake with the capacity to then kill her instead?

10. Why have sex with him and leave her presence all over the crime scene?

11. Why have him take time-stamped photos of her and then not think to take the camera with her? While he was taking those photos, was she really supposedly thinking “I’d better throw that camera in the washing machine before I leave”?

12. Why would she first attack a man who has 16-1/2 inch biceps, at least 70 pounds on her and a punching bag in his house, using a knife if she supposedly came with a gun?

13. Why, if she planned to stab him in the shower, does she not do it during the 40+ seconds he is standing with his back to her?

14. Why after supposedly stabbing him in the shower does she let him go stand at the sink?

15. If Travis had enough in him to go from the shower to the sink, stand there turning the faucet on and off while Jodi is supposedly stabbing him in the back, why didn’t he just turn around and smash her a good one?

16. Who except the one who is controlling the attack has the option to stop, stand at the sink and mess with the faucet?

17. If he still had enough energy to travel down the hallway to the bedroom (as the blood evidence indicates), why didn’t he just use that energy to stop all the stabbing she was supposedly doing during that time period?

18. Why did Travis have only five relatively minor wounds on his hands, only one on his dominant hand, and none on his lower arms if he was supposedly defending himself against a knife attack for more than a minute and perhaps up to two minutes?

19. Why would anyone who supposedly premeditated a murder intentionally (according to the State) fire off a gun at 5:30 in the afternoon in a residential neighborhood for no other reason than to supposedly make a statement to an already dead person?

20. Upon leaving why wouldn’t she have noticed the license plate was upside down while supposedly screwing in those little fasteners?

21. Why would anyone leaving a crime scene at approximately six in the evening (when a whole neighborhood might be arriving home from work) think it is a great plan, after just killing someone, to be squatting down, reattaching a license plate when, as the State contends, the whole purpose of removing them was to make the car unidentifiable, untraceable and certainly unassociated with her?

22. Why does she make cell phone calls in Arizona heading north from Kingman toward Hoover Dam, thus negating the supposed reason for borrowing the gas cans or turning off her cell phone?

23. Why does she fill the gas cans in Salt Lake City if their purpose was to hide her trip into Arizona? Was she also supposedly hiding her trip from her so-called alibi home to Yreka?

24. How is it Jodi supposedly came up with the most moronic murder plan in modern times but (according to the State), was able to use all her “caginess” to pull the wool over the eyes of three experts with more than 90 years of collective experience in their respective fields? (Are we really allowed to have it both ways when someone’s life is at stake?)

25. If Jodi was planning to lie about the whole horrifying event while under oath, why during those 4+ years did she not come up with a reasonable scenario about what happened during those final moments rather than telling us she can’t remember? Why supposedly fake PTSD when she could easily have just made up something to fit the scene? I was able to envision a reasonable scenario by just looking ten minutes at the crime scene photos…and I wasn’t even there.

For an example of how confirmation bias works, look [[ResponseToQuestions|here]] at one typical respondent’s answers to some of these questions.

Reasonable Doubt
<<< Judicial & Social Injustices

If you would care to contribute (even a small amount) to Jodi’s appellate fund so that this egregious injustice can be overturned, please go irrevocable trust not associated with this site or this author)